Sometimes I'm unsure if I should click the little wheel to share the content as I feel it's important information but don't agree with the actual content.
An example is the recent sentencing of 35 years for Bradley Manning. I think the sentence is too harsh and I worry that if I share the article, it'll come across as if I endorse it.
What do you do in instances like this?
It's just sharing it with others because you think it should be read, not that you agree with the article or its content. In fact I'd prefer if the share button did NOT become a "I Agree" button, because that's one of the bigger problems with other content aggragator sites like Reddit, and Digg before it. You end up with only one type of material, the type that everyone agrees with and can circle jerk over. That's not what I want in my news or things I read. I want to read the good, the bad, and the not-so-pretty. But like others have said, if I see you share something, I just assume you want other people to read it because it's a good article, or has interesting content. I never assume the person sharing it endorses or fully agrees with the sentiment of the content though.
Think of it like this: By clicking the Hubwheel, you're not saying 'Bradley Manning was sentenced to 35 years - I like this', you're saying (to your set of followers) 'Hey, did you hear about Bradley Manning being sentenced to 35 years?' The implied grammar and vocabulary of social media UX is important. I dislike Facebook's Like button because it doesn't offer Dislike as an alternative. As a verb, I'd refer to the Hubwheel button as the Discuss button or perhaps the Interest button. However there is a confusion for me in Hubski's grammar. Clicking an article Hubwheel implies share/initiate discussion. Clicking the Hubwheel beside a comment seems to imply approve/reward/acknowledge.
Not for me. I reward a) effort and b) the way things are said. c) overwhelming knowledge tends to come hand in hand with a anyway. I'm pretty careful with what posts I share, though. I've devoted some time to trying to figure out what people follow me for (what they want me to share), and I usually think about that before I share anything. With exceptions.Clicking the Hubwheel beside a comment seems to imply approve/reward/acknowledge.
Really? That's nice of you. I don't really put a lot of thought into it. If something seems interesting, I'll share, regardless of what I've shared in the past.. I figure people follow me, because they found this or than interesting, but they can unfollow me if I'm posting crap all of a sudden. It's not personal, in that regard.I'm pretty careful with what posts I share, though. I've devoted some time to trying to figure out what people follow me for (what they want me to share), and I usually think about that before I share anything. With exceptions.
Well, I've never used Twitter much but if I had a bunch of Twitter followers because of what I had previously tweeted I think I'd be pretty selective. I feel like on hubski people follow other people whose judgment they trust on filtering material. This would matter more if hubski had thousands of users, but w/e.
Thanks for clarifying. It makes sense. I wonder if this is something worth explaining to new hubskiers? Or maybe this isn't a common confusion... maybe I'm the only hubsky dyslexic! That's a good point. This might be why I started to get confused. But everyone's explanations makes it clear now. Thank you.However there is a confusion for me in Hubski's grammar. Clicking an article Hubwheel implies share/initiate discussion. Clicking the Hubwheel beside a comment seems to imply approve/reward/acknowledge.
There exists a term in Arabic called 'wasta' which loosely translates as 'clout' or 'social power'. For me this somehow informs the Hubwheel. Clicking one either beside a post or a comment bestows upon its author some 'social clout' (which also adds up in their own personal Hubwheel). In Sufism, the term Baraka means 'blessing' or 'spiritual power'. Maybe clicking a Hubwheel really means that you publicly bestow your blessing upon a link or comment?
I never thought of it in such a poetic way. I shall bear this in mind, specially when hubsking in a zen state : )
Well, in site terminology it's known as 'sharing' if that does anything to ease your qualms. If I think it's interesting or something that needs more exposure I'll just share it whether I approve of the authors viewpoint or not. If I feel I need to further explain my views I'll leave a comment. Personally, if I saw you share an article about gang rape in india, Bradley Manning, a mass shooting, an injustice, or something alike I wouldn't think 'this person is endorsing this', I'd think 'this person thinks I need to see this'.
That's good to know. I wonder if this is the general feeling.I wouldn't think 'this person is endorsing this', I'd think 'this person thinks I need to see this'.
I think it is. This came up once before when lil pointed out that I shared something controversial. I did so because I knew it would spark conversation. I'll often share things because of the conversation and not at all because of the original post. But to your specific case, I would never assume that you agree with the sentencing just because you shared the post.
The only thing sharing a post says is that people should see this. It doesn't matter if the subject is something bad, just as long as it's interesting or important. You may even share things not because the link is good, but the discussion in the comments is. I've passed on sharing something while participating in the comments, but then later came back to click on the hub because the discussion turns out really interesting.